Procedural validity of the AUDADIS-5 depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder modules: Substance abusers and others in the general population

Abstract

Background Little is known about the procedural validity of lay-administered, fully-structured assessments of depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress (PTSD) disorders in the general population as determined by comparison to clinical re-appraisal, and whether this differs between current regular substance abusers and others. We evaluated the procedural validity of the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule, DSM-5 Version (AUDADIS-5) assessment of these disorders through clinician re-interviews. Methods Test-retest design among respondents from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III): (264 current regular substance abusers, 447 others). Clinicians blinded to AUDADIS-5 results administered the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5). AUDADIS-5/PRISM-5 concordance was indicated by kappa (κ) for diagnoses and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for dimensional measures (DSM-5 symptom or criterion counts). Results were compared between current regular substance abusers and others. Results AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 concordance for DSM-5 depressive disorders, anxiety disorders and PTSD was generally fair to moderate (κ =0.24–0.59), with concordance on dimensional scales much better (ICC=0.53–0.81). Concordance differed little between regular substance abusers and others. Conclusions AUDADIS-5/PRISM-5 concordance indicated procedural validity for the AUDADIS-5 among substance abusers and others, suggesting that AUDADIS-5 diagnoses of DSM-5 depressive, anxiety and PTSD diagnoses are informative measures in both groups in epidemiologic studies. The stronger concordance on dimensional measures supports the current movement towards dimensional psychopathology measures, suggesting that such measures provide important information for research in the NESARC-III and other datasets, and possibly for clinical purposes as well.

The epidemiology of DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder in the United States: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III

“…Test-retest reliability of past-year and prior-to-the-past-year PTSD diagnoses was fair (κ=0.41 and 0.44, respectively); reliability of the dimensional PTSD criteria scale was good (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]=0.69) [36]. Procedural validity, assessed as concordance between the AUDADIS-5 and the semistructured, clinician-administered Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5) [37] in a large general population sample, was fair to moderate across time frames (κ=0.34–0.46); concordance of dimensional criteria scales between the instruments was good (ICC=0.69) [38]. …”

“…Procedural validity, assessed as concordances between AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 diagnoses, were mostly fair to good; between their dimensional criteria scales, mainly good to excellent [38, 39]. …”

The Epidemiology of Antisocial Behavioral Syndromes in Adulthood

“…Procedural validity was assessed using the semistructured, clinician-administered Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version, 54,55 in a large general population sample. Concordances between AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 diagnoses were mostly fair to good; between their dimensional criteria scales, mainly good to excellent.…”

“…Concordances between AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 diagnoses were mostly fair to good; between their dimensional criteria scales, mainly good to excellent. 54,55 …”

Five-Factor Model Personality Profiles: The Differences Between Alcohol and Opiate Addiction Among Females

“…Over the past decades the prevalence of alcohol and substance abuse has markedly increased worldwide (Brady & Li 2014, Hasin et al 2015. Research in this area has been mainly focused on male substance abusers.…”